Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Herbert J. Gans introduced the concept of symbolic ethnicity in 1979 in a study of the assimilation and acculturation of third-generation and later descendants of European immigrants to the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It may or may not be applicable in the study of those whose forebears immigrated after World War II or those African Americans, Native Americans, and Mexican Americans whose ancestors arrived before the United States was established.

The concept is used to support a compromise position between, on the one hand, a straight-line approach predicting that the logic of a modern democratic society ensures a steady decline in ethnicity with each succeeding postimmigration generation until it disappears and, on the other hand, the claim of a revival of ethnicity. Symbolic ethnicity is seen as a form of ethnicity that can adapt to changing circumstances and, thus, can persist with no predictable end but without a revival of earlier modes of ethnicity. This entry looks at the range of analyses in which the concept has been employed, notes the defining characteristics of symbolic ethnicity, and identifies common examples of its manifestation.

Use of the Term

The concept of symbolic ethnicity, but not the term itself, represents a development of Gans's analysis of the past, present, and future of U.S. Jewry in the 1956 volume of Commentary. Subsequently, symbolic ethnicity has been used in analyses of other ethnic groups in the United States, including Armenians, Finns, Italians, Louisianan Cajuns, and Jews. More generally, Mary C. Waters used the idea in her discussion of the choice of ethnicity among Roman Catholics in the United States. Interestingly, despite its origin, the concept of symbolic ethnicity also appears in analyses of multiculturalism in Canada by Lance W. Roberts and Rodney A. Clifton, of Danish Jewry after World War II by Andrew Buckser, and of Mexican Americans by Thomas Macias.

Defining Characteristics of Symbolic Ethnicity

Symbolic ethnicity entails feeling or being identified with a particular ethnicity, but it does not necessarily entail either practicing an ongoing ethnic culture or participating in an existing organization, formal or informal, of fellow ethnics. The symbolic ethnic may feel part of or identify with a collectivity that is either real and contemporary or mythic or historical.

Moreover, symbolic ethnicity is voluntary rather than ascribed, situationally relevant rather than pervasive, and idiosyncratic rather than socially or consen-sually defined. Symbolic ethnicity does not necessarily influence the choice of friends, mates, or neighbors. Furthermore, symbolic ethnicity is constructed so that it does not interfere with integration into the economic, political, and social life of the United States. Thus, it is compatible with a middle-class lifestyle.

Nevertheless, people may use symbolic ethnicity to differentiate themselves from others in what they see as an overly homogenized society or culture. In short, symbolic ethnicity enables a person to be essentially, but not exactly, like every other U.S. citizen. However, some have suggested that the rise of symbolic ethnicity among descendants of European immigrants is an aspect of identity politics, that is, a way of asserting their whiteness as a type of European American rather than as an African or Hispanic American.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading